Why does everyone hate Andrew Lloyd Webber?- Page 2

[Liz_Bennet]

Posted: 6/23/05 at 11:43pm

I don't even hate Evita. But I hate Cats. Oh, yes.

Anyway. I think, if you'll excuse a film metaphor, Andrew Lloyd Webber makes the musical equivalent of big summer blockbuster movies (most likely produced by Jerry Bruckheimer). Sondheim is more like a director who is popular at Cannes, and maybe even wins an Oscar once in a while, but is a little too oddball for a giant mainstream audience. And different people like different things.

Webber is not very subtle, he's grand (meaning big), showy, and commercial. Sondheim is complex, not as easy to understand at first hearing, and chooses some pretty weird stories to tell, often telling them in unconventional ways. I don't like Webber much at all. Lots of people can enjoy both. And we can be very defensive of our opinions. (Sondheim is better, by the way. Look at my avatar.)

[Phantom05]

Posted: 6/23/05 at 11:51pm

MyDreamsRecurring -

You are majorly screwed up! For you to say that it is only theatre people who hate Phantom of the Opera, then you are absolutely rediculous! I am a professional actor, and I have to say that I love Phantom very much, as do the THEATRE PEOPLE who currently protray the characters on Broadway, tour, and around the world! The role of the Phantom is a dream role of of mine, and I very much hope that my dream eventually becomes a reality someday. As for your comment regarding the realism of the characters, HAVE YOU READ THE BOOK? The book is gorgeous, yet melodramatic, ficticious, over-done, and a bit unorganized. Before you go trying to play yourself off as a speaker of all theatre people, try thinking before you speak. I guarantee you that my IQ isn't low, and I resent the fact that you were even able to make that statement on this board.

See Ya!

Phantom05

[jam_man]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 12:32am

I'm sure he/she didn't mean ALL theatre people hate Phantom, just that of those who do, the vast majority are. Of course, some theatre people like Phantom and ALW or else you'd never be able to see any of his shows 'cause he couldn't find actors.

Let me start my rant be saying I'm a huge Sondheim desciple and a spokesperson for the "I HATE ANDREW LLOYD WEBBER" PEOPLE OF SOUTHERN ILLINOIS:CHAPTER 26. That said, I think the movie example of summer blockbuster movie vs. high-quality artsy film is a great way to describe it. Shows like Phantom, Mamma Mia!, Les Miz (I love the latter and even kind of like the first, though I recognize their many faults and overrated-ness) have become big successes, and have caused producers to make them the strict model for how to put on a successful new musical. They play it safe, not so much as putting on a good musical as much as putting on a "good" SHOW. Since it's so hard to make money producing on Broadway, even without the multimillion dollar investments, trying something different and couragous is out of the question. Because of that also, the "big" shows such as Cats and Phantom become the "must see show" for non-theatre folks. They see it and either think, A) "Hey, that was nice, but if THAT'S the best they have to offer, than that'll be the last musical I'll see for a while." or B) "WoW, that was overrated! If THAT'S the "best" musical ever, than I'm never going to the theatre again!" Then they never see the musicals that actually are the best we have to offer, like Sweeney Todd, Cabaret, or Company. To the general public, musical theatre isn't an art form. It's supposed to be big, sprakelly, and flashy shows that aren't meant to be ABOUT anything. So they shy away from shows that don't fit that description, so Sondheim shows don't do so well financially.

I don't hate Lloyd Webber personally (though my friends and family would disagree there), he just doesn't write quality musicals. However, in his defense, most of the problems with his shows are with the lyrics or the book, so they aren't entirly his fault.

[Jimmyojimmy]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 12:34am

I totally dont know what your talking about with this thread, ALW is amazing, I love him, hes a genius, and so is sondheim, I dont think there need to be any more threads hating on bway stars and librettists

[Enjolras77]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 12:56am

But who is to say that "big blockbuster" musicals aren't good? Who's to say that something has to be "courageous" to be good? What can't there be a happy medium between both styles and to each his own? That is the problem here. People can't just prefer one style without bashing the other. I am a professional musician with a degree in music. I appreciate and like the complexities of Sondheim and Guettel and the like...but sometimes I like the easiness and traditional pop melodies of a Lloyd Webber or a Wildhorn. A few years back I wrote my senior thesis dissecting the works of Brown, Guettel, and LaChiusa (I even went overboard and created a website dedicated to the works of the three). I was (and still am) engrossed in their music. However, I still love to listen to the simpler melodies of ALW, Wildhorn, Yazbeck, etc, where I can get lost in the music and not have to think about it. Sometimes I want to hear a traditional verse/refrain song. This may be a new concept to people, but not everyone wants to always have to think and dissect what they are seeing or try to find some deep social meaning to it. Sometimes people want to go to the theatre to have a good time, laugh a lot, and see the spectacle of enormous sets, fancy costumes, and special effects. That is why a show like Mamma Mia! is so popular. Sometimes people just want to be entertained and leave the theatre smiling. Other times maybe they want to see something darker, or more courageous. There is room enough for all kinds on Broadway. It is not a sin to like Sweeney Todd and Phantom.

[Mamie]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 1:02am

I'm sorry jam_man but those two options you give (They see it and either think, A) "Hey, that was nice, but if THAT'S the best they have to offer, than that'll be the last musical I'll see for a while." or B) "WoW, that was overrated! If THAT'S the "best" musical ever, than I'm never going to the theatre again!" Then they never see the musicals that actually are the best we have to offer, like Sweeney Todd, Cabaret, or Company.) just don't make much sense.

If you took all the people who've come to NY and saw an ALW show and then made one of those two choices, NOBODY would go to theatre again - except theatre people. And shows like "Phantom" wouldn't be running for more years than a lot of people on this board have been alive. The 'theatre people' had better get over the idea that shows that appeal to the masses are basically lousy and only those that are artistically challenging are worth anything. That's just incredibly ridiculous. Many, many theatre lovers get their introduction to the stage by way of those big, POPULAR (there's that dirty word again) shows. And they go on and their tastes grow and develop. I know this is true because I'm one of them. I primarily go to straight theatre now because I prefer it to musicals. ANYBODY's musical. I certainly didn't start that way. I love some shows like Phantom just as much today as I did the first time I saw it. My taste has just grown to include even more styles.

I'm sorry - but you only see this conceit on boards that are primarily attended by theatre professionals. And Theatre (capital T) cannot be sustained by only those. You BETTER appeal to the masses or the whole business is going to die away.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 1:18am

It's not that people hate the man (and even though I am not his biggest fan, there are several of his melodies that are quite beautiful. The lyrics however .... well that's not Webbers's doing.) But with the huge successes of the spacatcles he has written has come a price: They used the elborate productions to justify ticket price increases which in turn spread across to other less elaborate shows. It set up audience expectations that a Broadway Musical had to have all sorts of special effects and overblown melodies (usually coupled with banal lyrics!)

These shows have attrcated more than their share of attention while other, more deserving shows, have been neglected. Because the Lloyd Webber shows (CATS, STARLIGHT EXPRESS, POTO, SUNSET BLVD) were the main culprits, they take the blame along with the man who wrote the music and produced them.

[Thenardier]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 1:22am

JCS is awesome!

[Enjolras77]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 1:23am

Maybe not overblown melodies...but both Into the Woods and Sweeney have their share of special effects and production values...most notable the recent Into the Woods revival. The sets and special effects were breaktaking...so ALW is not the only culprit in huge productions values....maybe just in banal lyrics...LOL

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 1:25am

Nice observation, Front Row.

[jam_man]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 1:42am

I didn't mean that what appeals to the masses can never be good, and if that's what it looked like I was saying, I apologize. I am a theatre purist/geek, I'll be the first to admit it. The "blockbuster movies/musicals" can certainly be very good - I think Les Miz and even Phantom are fairly good, as are the movies Pirates of the Carribean and Batman Begins. The problem is, when a quality movie/musical/play/TV show/book, whathaveyou, becomes a big financal success, producers try to recreate what they believe made them successful and copy it to their new project, often to not so good results. That's nothing new - it's been going on since the greeks first started writing plays. It has been ocurring if not more often, then much more obviously, in recent years, but it isn't anything new. For every Rent, Les Miz, Phantom, or Mamma Mia!, there will always be 2-3 Brooklyns, Dance of the Vampires, Jekal & Hydes, or Good Vibrations (sorry to the fans of those particular shows).


I truly respect what Lloyd Webber shows have done to bring in new theatre fans, God knows we need them. I didn't become a theatre person by way of Les Miz or Phantom, as I have been doing community theatre since I was 5, and got hooked on Sondheim in 4th grade when on a flight to Hawaii, they had a radio channel playing selections from A Little Night Music, but I still respect them bringing in new fans. However, that doesn't make the material itself any better.

BTW, I worded my "option A)" incorrectly, I see now. What I ment behind it was more like, "That was nice - not BRILLENT, but nice."

And also, "You only see this conceit on boards that are primarily attended by theatre professionals" because most other boards aren't ment for theatre talk. Not saying that any given board would agree with me if they did talk about it, but that's why you don't see it at many other boards (except All That Chat, that is).

[toodramatic]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 1:56am

Ok so no one really understood my original posting...

First off when I asked the question 'Why does everyone hate Andrew Lloyd Webber?' I was not literally saying that everyone hated ALW, I was referencing the 'why does everyone hate rent?' thread on the brit site.

Secondly, I did not intend to start the old Sondheim v. Webber fight up again (though its been interesting) I was merely referencing them b/c they had been used on the previous thread I was refering too.

My point was that people should not be so quick to jump on a show or its writer and rip it a part because theres someone across the pond who could be loathing your show just as much. Im not saying we should stop analyzing shows but for gods sake we should be civil about it.

Carry on.

[nystateomind04]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 1:59am

"The 'theatre people' had better get over the idea that shows that appeal to the masses are basically lousy and only those that are artistically challenging are worth anything."

Hmmm... No. I don't ever intend on getting over that idea.

[Justice]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 2:32am

By the way, the actors who were in "Good Vibrations" hated that show, but they were getting paid. So, you can't really say that the actor's in Phantom love Phantom.

[Pinguin]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 2:46am

It's not ridiculous to like those happy go lucky popular shows; props to the people that can enjoy them but maybe hard core theatre folk want something more interesting or different when they go to the theatre. I don't think that's something that theatre people need to get over at all.

I like to be challenged when I see theatre. Maybe shows that "appeal to the masses" are basically fine but why should I care?

[cturtle]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 2:54am

i have been an ALW fan since i heard the first notes of JC SUPERSTAR

[Forester]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 3:04am

Webber make fun shows for the masses. Nothing wrong with that. I like his older stuff, up to Evita. I do have a soft spot for Phantom. Not the greatest musical work, but it's a fun show. It's like those movie where you just want to sit down and escape from reality for two hours or so.

[Madame X2]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 3:07am

When people become interested in musical theater, usually they are drawn into it by a certain show. In my past experiences those shows have usually been Rodgers and Hammerstien and ALW shows (but now it's turned into Wicked, but that is a different story entirely). i think there are those certain composers (mentioned above) whose shows have become musical theater staples; i.e "The Sound Of Music", "Phantom of the Opera" and "Cats" to name some. Then once those are seen, people start exploring more composers and shows. You get to your less popular musicals and discover more and more different types of musical theater. It's all about finding what's out there.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that ALW has a lot to offer. His shows draw in new audiences to musical theater because they are very showy and very "poppy". They are very commercially successful (for the most part) and popular.

I really don't know why I'm rambling about this at 2 in the morning.

Not everyone hate ALW, that's a very broad statement. And even if they did, what difference does it make? If people don't like an ALW show (POTO for example), then they probably have a reason. It's not as if the folks on this board are going around torching the theaters that Mr Webber's shows are playing at. His shows are still making hundreds of thousands of dollars a week.

"My point was that people should not be so quick to jump on a show or its writer and rip it a part because theres someone across the pond who could be loathing your show just as much."

So? Let them rip the show apart and let them loath it. One can not be so sensitive about people in another nation who don't share the same taste as one's self. That's why it's ART. It's all objective. No one needs to watch they're opinions of a show because they'll hurt the feelings of diehard fans. Sure, it would be rude to go up to Andrew Lloyd Webber and say "Your shows suck and I hate everything you've ever written", but to say so on the internet, which is used to share ideas, is no crime. Some British people hate RENT. Oh well, some Americans hate ALW shows. Big deal.

[Thenardier]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 3:30am

JCS is a masterpiece that ALW, himself, said he could never re-create. It is brilliant in both its execution and its development.

In a way it is a return to the old Broadway way. Back in the day, when songs from musicals made the charts...then JCS came along and "Superstar" made number one, was it?, on the charts. I don't see many of the shows today doing that.

Phantom of the Opera - the first time I saw it, I was bored. Went back again, loved it. Many people I know who are the complete opposite of "live theatre" loved POTO.

Cats - I know many people hate it, but I do enjoy the music. The show is one of my least favorties I have seen, but I still enjoy the music every now and again.

I don't understand why people can't just get off their high horse and enjoy a show. Why does it have to be a great piece of theatre? Why I can't it just be enjoyment?

[Greekmusicalfan]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 4:14am

I love most of ALW's work !

Posted: 6/24/05 at 4:23am

First off, I do hate RENT.

As for ALW, I love most of this stuff.. It's catchy. It might not be as smart as Sondheim, but oh well.

CATS - I love it.

[One Song Glory]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 5:47am

ALW's work got me into musicals and I love some of his other work.

[Justice]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 7:51am

It's weird...I can respect people who dislike Rent, but, when it comes to theatre people who like ALW...it's a different story.
Now, at the same time, i Can't criticize lovers of Webber. My bf LOVES Webber, and can't stand Sondheim, Jason Robert Brown, etc. We clash on composers. He likes his music simple and melodic (catchy tunes), where as I like my lyrics smart, and, at times, witty (catchy or non-catchy, eventually the songs will grow on me)
POTO is one of his favorite shows, (although he couldn't stand Butler's portrayel of the Phantom, but loved Panero's), and he knows how I feel, but at the same time, he will see a Sondheim show with me, and I will (begrudgingly and reluctantly, while rolling my eyes, sucking my teeth, and falling asleep in the theatre) see a Webber show with him. It's all about compromise...
He expresses his dislikes (He tolerated Assassins, but hated Parade) as do I, and we respect each others opinions.

[redhotinnyc2]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 7:56am

Obviously from many of the posts here, you can hardly say that "everyone" hates Webber!... I find his work mediocre at best (the only work of his that I appreciate in the least are his collaborations with Tim Rice...he seems to rise to a better level of writing when inspired by Rice's lyrics.)
I won't pay to see his shows - they simply bore me to death.
I have no idea how he became the legend that he is - but there's no accounting for taste, right? LOL..

[Justice]

Posted: 6/24/05 at 8:02am

redhot,
I completely agree. The only shows of his i like are the Rice ones, (except Joseph). But, i have heard JCS SO many times, I don't ever have to hear it again...
Yet, I loved Evita, both on stage and on screen.
It was in the 80's his music started to go down...starting from Synthetic pop, to stolen classical...